Double. A great BAM problem. In the other room, it
rates to start 1-(2)-DBL, and we'll often get to
play 2. So, sometimes -670 won't be any worse than
-110. [He's right about that. In fact, at both tables,
he's right about it! --Jeff] I hope partner has strong hearts.
[Or a strong heart if they score an overberry! --Jeff]

LEN

Do I know what my counterpart plays? If he plays Flannery, and
I know I am a better (or worse, or equal) defender, that might
affect my decision. [Probably they are not playing Flannery. --Jeff]

In a vacuum, X looks right.

MARSHALL

Dbl. Very close but I think we are more likely
than not to set them. Obviously not at IMPs. [Or even
matchpoints...this is a BAM problem only, I think. --Jeff]

BOBBY

I have good diamonds, and it doesn't look
like we're going anywhere. Pass.

ED

I have a little under two tricks expected in diamonds,
about one-third of a trick expected in clubs and we have
an eight-card and a seven-card fit. If I had to bet, I'd
say the opponents will not make but it is close. Too close
to double and possibly negate a winning result at the other
table. If I pass, LHO may take a shot at 3NT... which I will
not pass.

ROBB

Pass. I have some pesky cards for defense that will not
pull their weight on offense. LHO may even bid! I don't
expect to make 3 and I don't expect to play it undoubled.

DAVIDC

This one is tough. The allure of +200 is tempting. Plus 140
would be good but the possibility of -200 is threatening. -110 and
+100 is for wimps. Put me in the high testosterone BAM law abiders
(no more than 17 and hoping we have half the deck); the J,
shortness and 10 all sway me in favor of "pounding it."
-670 won't surprise me.

BARRY

Pass smoothly and hope partner can reopennot impossible
if I bid in tempo. [Nearly impossible. Partner almost never reopens
after Flannery because you don't play negative doubles after it. --Jeff]
Then I'll have to decide what to do of course!

JJ

DoubleLead a heart

Yes my double is aggressive (I was at the actual
tournament and believe the double is wrong on the
actual hand, but so what!) but BAM calls for
aggressive doubles when the opps are vul and we rate
to make a part score. (2 looks like a favorite.)

MIKE

Pass. No reason this shouldn't be a nine-card fit and it
is easy to see how my slow club winners could be either finessed
or ruffed away. The offensive potential is non-existant and
I don't think we are making 2 (and if so, they are probably -2),
so a plus score should be good enough to win the board and
-110 is probably normal when they are making.

DAVIDW

3. Despite my dearth of high cards, I want to boost
them once more. I will pound 4, albeit with some
trepidationif the diamond queen is on my left, my hand might collapse.

JEFF AT THE TABLE

Double.

WINNING ACTION

none, but doubling is -670 and
passing is better than that. 3 is -200.
LHO has an easy double. Nothing works because
teammates were also -670 in 2x.

CONSENSUS

Action

Votes

Dbl

6

Pass

5

3

1

JEFF UPON REFLECTION

Chris' point that much
of the time, our cards will get to play 2
at the other table is importantif 3 makes
and they get to play 2, we have lost the
board no matter what. On the other hand, if
partner has a stiff diamond, won't the auction
go 1-(2)-Dbl-(3); 3-(pass)-pass-(Dbl)?
That rates to go for 200, which means that
doubling could blow our teammates' already won
board. On the other hand, if partner has two
or more diamonds, we rate to get to play 2, so
doubling is necessary. Which is more likely?
I don't know. It's a very close call. At
matchpoints, doubling is less necessary because some
of the field is getting to 3x or 3 or other
odd spots, so -110 isn't a zero, though it rates
to be a poor score. At BAM, however, there's only the
one pair to compare against, making double a
real candidate.

BAM, unfavorable

76 J762 A95 A1053

CHO

RHO

You

LHO

1

2

3

3

4

4

?

CHRIS

Pass. Nonforcing auction, no trump tricks, I consider
doubling in front of partner to be horrible.

LEN

X. In a nonforcing pass situation, X shows extra values.
Of course, I have a min, but the A's are good. Pard might
have something like xx AKxxxx x KQxx.

MARSHALL

Dbl. I think I had a minimum offensively for
my 3 bid but, of course, very good defense. My 3 bid showed a limit
raise or better, Pass should show better (or at least a max or my bid
based mostly on distribution. [Marshall obviously thinks
pass is forcing. He is in a minority of one. I for one
disagree vehemently. But I'm used to that. --Jeff]

BOBBY

I double. I don't think they're making.
5 doesn't look good.

ED

Dbl. Of course they could make... the Angels could also
win the World Series. But neither is likely (unless the
Angels trade for Randy Johnson). I have good defense and not
exceptional offense for my bidding and I must express my
opinion to my partner. [It wasn't likely the Angels would
win the Series two years ago, either, but it happened! --Jeff]

ROBB

Double. Second choice is pass, not forcing.

DAVIDC

Pass. American Airlines are nice but I have the minimum
limit raise I promised. My pass is not forcing at anybody's
vulnerability.

BARRY

Pass; not a forcing auction in my book. My limit raises do not set up
forcing passes at the four-level. Partner's 4 call instead of 4 or 4
does not announce ownership or invite me to bid so my only choice is double
and two small trumps does not cut it for me! [You can still act.
After all, 3 is not limited. Surely you'd do something
with another ace. --Jeff]

JJ

Pass (not forcing). Pard has a better shot of getting
this right than I do.

MIKE

Pass. The 4 bid in a live auction might show extras, but
it also might just show long hearts. If partner was bidding
to make, presumably he will double. Otherwise, at this paint
any other action is hazardous.

DAVIDW

Double. Nothing certain, but two aces in their suits
ought to provide sufficient defense. I hope CHO is not the
secretive sort who would conceal a club suit when bidding 4.

JEFF AT THE TABLE

Double.

WINNING ACTION

none. Passing leads to -450. Bidding
5 leads to -500 or -800. Or -450 if they take the
push. Teammates, not surprisingly, didn't find this
game. 3 was a bit of a push, but 2 was also
unduplicated having been bid on a 5332 11-count.
In fact, our teammates were never in the auction.

CONSENSUS

Action

Votes

Dbl

7

Pass

5

JEFF UPON REFLECTION

I think it's very likely that
teammates will not find 4. 3 looks like a strange
bid (it was) and sound teammates might well not find
it. If so, playing 4 undoubled can't be right. If it's going
down, we need to double in order to try to cover teammates'
small minus. If it's making, we need to "save," hoping
either to push them to 5 or make or they forget
to double and only get us one. But we don't have to
decide. Partner is still there and can also tell that
playing 4 undoubled is probably wrong. This time he
has nowhere to go. Neither do you in a sense, but you
don't get to find that out until later. Is your very
high defense to offense ratio sufficient to double in
front of partner? The panel thinks it's close.
I agree.

Only Marshall thinks pass is forcing. I think he's
simply mistaken. This auction is covered by two of
my forcing pass rules: (1) limit raises do not create
forces, and (2) if one side bids 4 and the other bids
4, normally passes are not forcing.

Give pard xx AKxxx x Kxxxx and I might
make six. [...and partner would have opened
or bid 2NT last time. --Jeff] Since XX wasn't
business, I should have bid 3 earlier, at least.
Since I didn't, I want to bid 5 or more, but it's
certainly not safe. I guess double is my best call.

MARSHALL

DBl. This seems clear-cut, but I would have
bid 3 the previous round. WKhy hide my offensive values?
I didn't know the opponents were going to bid 4.

BOBBY

Double. Seems obvious.

ED

Pass. Tough call. It would be nice to punish LHO for such
impudent bidding when we hold more than half the deck. However,
LHO is bidding to make and I have no surprises for him. He is
certainly distributional and we may not beat this if LHO is
void in clubs. J10xxxxx Kx Qxxx  opposite Qxx Axxx KJxx Qx
with partner holding  Qxxx xxx AKxxxx certainly fits the
auction. [I think partner should bid clubs with that, not
double; he doesn't want to play a high-level heart contract,
but he does have lots of interest in clubs. --Jeff] I think
partner is more likley to be 4-6 than 5-5 since 1NT would be
a better description with 5-5 distribution. If LHO has overbid,
there is a good chance our teammates will be a trick lower
undoubled giving us a win on the board. It could be that
doubling is the only way to lose the board.

ROBB

Very close. If they are just too high, shouldn't matter.
But if they are in a "normal" contract, advantage to double
is to warn partner off disasterous club lead from Kxxx.
Disadvantage is that they may be cold and I chucked half a
board.

I would double and prepare to apologize.

DAVIDC

This problem wouldn't be here unless they made it,
[Hah! A triple-cross! --Jeff] but I want to discourage
partner from psyching passed hand take-out doubles in the
future. Let me guess that partner is x xxxxx xx AKxxx
and we have a double game swing (Partner should have bid 1NT
with that hand.) [2NT? --Jeff] By the way, why not bid 3
in response to the takeout double?

BARRY

Double. I can't sell out nowcan I?
Well even if I can, I won't!

MIKE

Double. This time I got 'em.

DAVIDW

Pass. A vulnerable opponent who bids like this expects to
make it, so I am cautious. My hand is way too promising
defensively to save; in fact the double looks so obvious
that it feels like a trap for the panel. I lead the jack of
hearts and hope CHO can take a trick.

JEFF AT THE TABLE

Double.
Finally I doubled something we could beat.

WINNING ACTION

none. +100 was the best we could do,
but was a loss anyway.

CONSENSUS

Action

Votes

Double

9

Pass

2

This time the panel was mostly of one mind.
It'll be the only time in this set.

JEFF UPON REFLECTION

I think 2 is plenty, despite
others' claims that they would have bid more. For
what it's worth, 3 should be preemptive with 2
being a strong raise somewhere. Better still is
that 2 is a good hand with clubs and 3 is a good
hand with hearts. But partner is a passed hand and
he didn't bid 2NT this time, so hoping for a reasonable
5-5 from partner is too much. The perfect 5-4 is possible.
And vs. that, game is still not cold. Add another jack to
that hand and partner would open it. Giving up on game
seems right to me.

Doubling seems obvious. Finally I doubled something
and beat it. Not that it helped to win the board.
Despite it's obviousness, is it really right? If
4 is a normal spot for them, will it be doubled
at the other table? Seems pretty likely. It also
seems likely that they are going down. So we probably
should double. If 4 is not a normal place for them,
should we double? If they are making, our teammates
are not going to be able to halve the board, so the
double won't cost. If they are going down, we might
as well double. Moreover, we may have a partscore
to protect and we may well get them two. So, yes,
even at BAM, we should double. I think this is the
sort of reasoning one needs to use for all close BAM
doubles.

Sometimes these decisions are just best solved
using one's personality. Let's see if there is a pattern:

Panelist

1

2

3

Chris

Dbl

Pass

Dbl

Len

Dbl

Dbl

Dbl

Marshall

Dbl

Dbl

Dbl

Bobby

Pass

Dbl

Dbl

Ed

Pass

Dbl

Pass

Robb

Pass

Dbl

Dbl

DavidC

Dbl

Pass

Dbl

Barry

Pass

Pass

Dbl

JJ

Dbl

Pass

?

Mike

Pass

Pass

Dbl

DavidW

3

Dbl

Pass

Jeff

Dbl

Dbl

Dbl

Nope, no correlation. And Mike, JJ, and Marshall knew
the boards...and no two of them matched answers!

Pass. Partner could be very weak. I might have
raised if I had the A instead of the king. [With that,
I don't think it ia a problem, but an automatic raise.
This is red at IMPs, after all. --Jeff]

BOBBY

I think it's very close between pass and raise.
I raise.

ED

3. Worth the risk, e.g.Kxxxx Axxxx x xx.

ROBB

Pass, but tempting.

DAVIDC

Partner can have a 10-count. If he is short in
, game may be decent. Something like Kxxxx Qxxxx x Qx
has play for game. Vul at IMPs I will bid 3.

BARRY

Pass; second choice no bidno third choice. Wrong minor suit cards,
though bad diamonds is better than good ones. Give me A instead of the K
and J and you might tempt me but even then it is not clear. [First
person to think this isn't close. If the K were improved to the
A, I'd think it not close. --Jeff]

JJ

Pass, I've missed games before by passing hands like
this, but it's not quite enough to merit a 3 bid.

MIKE

Pass. I like that my diamonds are bad, as partner would
upgrade a borderline hand with secondary diamonds to our
detriment. That said, this hand needs a perfecto to make
game. I want partner to continue to bid 2 with 5+4 and
a bad handand have a chance that something good will
happen. If everytime he catches a fit he has to play at the
three-level that is counter-productive. If you bid 3 here,
does that mean you expect partner to pass 1 holding
Qxxxx Qxxx x xxx or to bid 2 over 1NT? [Likewise, do you
want him making game tries with Kxxxx A10xxx x xx? And
do you really think the opponents would be silent if
partner held a 4-count? --Jeff]

DAVIDW

Pass. Gee, I have a great hand considering it is a
minimum. But unless CHO is 6-4 and is void in diamonds,
game is unlikely to be cold. In my preferred methods, CHO
could invite via 2 with as little as Kxxxx AQxx x Qxx. Let's
take our +140. If I were to make a try, I would test him with 3.

JEFF AT THE TABLE

3.

WINNING ACTION

pass. +110 is the maximum on the hand.

CONSENSUS

Action

Votes

Pass

7

3

1

3

4

JEFF UPON REFLECTION

I think it's extremely close.
At matchpoints, passing is obvious; there's no
reason to risk the plus for what is unlikely to
be a cold game. But red at IMPs, partner can have
Kxxxx Axxxx x xx and 4 is pretty good. Even with
his minors reversed, 4 is up to par. You know
you aren't getting doubled in 4, so you are risking
five IMPs (for +110 vs. -100) to try to win ten.
I'll lay 2-1 odds that we aren't going down at the
3-level.

Should 3 be weak diamonds and good clubs or should
it be an artificial 3 bid stronger than 3? Since
bidding to the 3-level at all is very rare, probably
we don't need such a fine distinction, and letting
partner know that Q10xxx Axxxx x xx is good while
Q10xxx Axxxx xx x is bad seems like a worthwhile
gain. I would have assumed the other treatment,
(parallel to similar auctions which usually happen
at the 4-level) but I'm convinced this one is
better. I like 3. Given that the panel thinks
bidding vs. passing is about 50/50, the vigorish
from 3 tips it, I think.

IMPs, favorable

x Jxx Jxxxxx xxx

RHO

You

LHO

CHO

1

Pass

4!

5

Dbl

Pass

6

Pass

Pass

?

4 was a Splinter raise.
(Why, if he was just going
to bid slam anyway, I don't know.)

CHRIS

Abstain. Would want to be at the table, know my
opponents' habits, etc. [They were unknowns. First match. --Jeff]

LEN

Hand improved when pard showed heart support.
I would have bid 6, lead directing, my last turn,
but 6 is too rich. I pass. [I admit that I have
no idea what he's talking about. His further explanation
didn't enlighten me, either. --Jeff]

MARSHALL

7. I suppose, theoretically, I shouldn't sacrifice
ahead of partner, but partner won't realize how bad my hand is.
With the Q I would pass.

BOBBY

I pass. We'd have to take 7 tricks to make
1 IMP, and have the possibility of losing a
lot more. I lead a heart.

ED

Pass. Nobody said they were going to make it (partner
could win the A and the K or Q[Bingo! --Jeff]) and we
will be in -1400 to -1700 territory in 7. Better to take
our chances against 6.

ROBB

[7.] I think pard can take 5 tricks and they can take 12.
Only question is whether they can take 13. I take a
chance and bid hoping pard can take 6 tricks.

DAVIDC

Don't see why I wouldn't lead a . Oh, this isn't a lead problem?

BARRY

7. OK; I think they will make and I've been had for
a sucker before.

JJ

Tough, tough call. It's likely to be 8 IMPs if I am
wrong (1430 vs. 1100) It might be helpful to know what
the double of 4 would have been. [Good point. Most
play some form of Rosencranz (or Guildenstern), but I think at
this vulnerability, it should be suggesting a save. --Jeff]
However, if 5 was a good save against 4 then 7 must
be a good save unless they are going down. I'd very much
like to be at the table for this one. However, if the 6 bid
was made quickly and confidently by a sound player, I'd
probably save. If those conditions aren't met then
I'd pass.

MIKE

Pass. I'm afraid they may bid seven if I saveor we'll
probably be down 1400 anyway. I don't think we're beating
them, so it is pretty close.

DAVIDW

Pass. Although I don't expect to beat this, I have no reason
to believe the save will be cheap, or that teammates will bid
the slam. So I may as well hope for a plus.

JEFF AT THE TABLE

wasn't there. I'd probably pass.
I don't like high-level saves without any tricks
for partner. It wouldn't surprise me that I have
one entry and one trick, which I'll have to use
at trick 2. If I had a fourth heart, I'd save.
My teammate bid 7, which worked out very poorly.

CONSENSUS

Action

Votes

Pass

8

7

3

2/1 in favor of passing. Sort of a consensus.

WINNING ACTION

don't bid. 6 has no play at all.
7x goes for sticks and wheels.

JEFF UPON REFLECTION

Tough call but I'd pass.
RHO thought 5 was too high. LHO's bidding was
inconsistent. Maybe he was wrong. This may just
be a personality test. I'm not a big saver; I
tend to defend. I also figure that partner can
play me for this much help and save on his own
if it's right. Now give me a fourth trump...

There is a theory issue. Partner bid 5 rather
than doubling 4. Assuming no Rosencranz (double
means lead clubs) or Guildenstern (double means
lead diamonds), which I think is best at favorable,
why did partner bid instead of soliciting your
opinion with a double? Maybe he has some defense
and knows what to do at the slam level? Maybe
he was trying to blow away their Blackwood and
get them into slam off two aces. If so, saving
in front of partner will get you serious egg
on your face. Maybe he just has a huge offensive
hand and was putting more pressure on them.
Who knows? If it were easy, it'd not be here.

IMPs, none vul

Q1098x xx xxx xxx

CHO

RHO

You

LHO

1NT (10-12)

Pass

?

Methods are 2-way stayman
and transfers at the 3-level only.

CHRIS

Two of some major. I think 2 might get me in
trouble, but it is probably the best bid.

LEN

I guess I pass, but 2 is fine.

MARSHALL

Pass. I think the opponents are more likely to
enter the bidding if I bid 2 (perhaps by doubling) than if I pass.
Oh, I didn't look ahead to see the range or how we were playing.
Tempting to bid 2 or 2, but don't want to risk a disaster.

BOBBY

I think 2 is right then. It has some reasonable preemptive
effect, and it's very difficult for them to double us for penalties.
After

1NT

P

3

X

P

P

3

X

it seems a lot easier for them to do the right thing, whatever that is.

ED

2 (before the penalty doubling starts). Here's a good story.
Many years ago at a National in St. Louis, I opened a 1st seat
10-12 1NT. LHO passed and Mike Smolen, my partner, had xxx Qxx xxx xxxx.
He tried to bluff the opponents by jumping to 3NT. On a good day the
cards would have been evenly divided and we might have escaped
the double. On this day Jack Spear, my RHO, apparently thinking
that two decks might have gotten mixed up together, asked if
everybody was holding the cards with the horses on the back.
After confirming that we all held cards from the same deck,
he chuckled and said "Double." He held AJx Kx KJx AKQJx.

[Many years ago, I had a similar occurrance. I was playing a
regional pairs game with someone I'd never met before. We didn't
have time to discuss methods, so when I held xxx xxx x KQJ10xx
at favorable and heard him open 1NT (15-17), I shrugged and bid 3NT.
It went slow pass, pass, slow pass. Partner played out a trick or two
and then just threw it in for down 9. He held xxx xxx KQJ10xx x. --Jeff]

ROBB

2. Let's have some fun.

DAVIDC

This one is classic. I bid two of a majorhearts.

BARRY

2. Natural and to play? Good enough for me!

JJ

I bid 2, (transfer, even if pard thinks it to
play!!!!!) My 2nd choice is to bid Stayman and pass
either 2 or 2, (or correct 2 to 2) If pard bids
2, then I could raise to 3. In any case, I try to
make it difficult for the opps to find their probable
game (4 or 3NT). [I don't think Stayman will help
very often. LHO will double and partner will show
a major or not. If he shows spades, you might choose
to jump to 4, knowing they can make 4. Problem is,
they can't go wrong. 4 will probably go for 500 and
5 will make anyway. If partner doesn't bid a major,
they shouldn't have much trouble finding hearts and
game. --Jeff]

MIKE

Pass. This puts immediate pressure on LHO to bid or
end the auction. [Pressure? I think he rates to be
itching to bid. --Jeff] If we're doubled, I can still
run to 2, but I think this will make it slightly harder
for them to find game, as 2 gives RHO another shot. If
they were vul and I had a sixth spade, I would consider 3NT.

DAVIDW

2. I would like to transfer to 2 (yes hearts, not
spades), but apparently my methods don't allow that. So the
question is which lie will sound plausible. Maybe we can win
a few IMPs for down 5 or 6 against their game. I will pass
CHO's response, correcting to 2 if they wake up and double.
[I don't understand why transferring to hearts is better
than simply bidding them. --Jeff]

JEFF AT THE TABLE

2. A total psych.

WINNING ACTION

none. (Detect a pattern here?)
After 2, the opponents bid 2NT-3; 3-3NT. Did
they know what they were doing? No. 3NT was cold
anyway. Yes, they had a 4-4 heart fit.

CONSENSUS

Action

Votes

Pass

3

2

1

2

6

2

2

Hah! A majority psychs!

JEFF UPON REFLECTION

I like 2. Good and honest
opponents play doubles of 2 as takeout and 2NT
as minors. (Maybe that's not best...perhaps 2NT
really ought to be a good balanced hand?) We
could easily play 2 undoubled down five or six
to win a few IMPs.

Most of the panel psyched something (some passed,
which I think is a psych, but most bid their short
major.) Next time this comes up and the ACBL powers
that be get on my case, I shall quote this result
that shows that the "normal" action here is to psych.

ALL IN ALL

This is a brutal set of problems. Deciding
whether to make a penalty double at BAM is one of the hardest
(and randomest) decisions in bridge. BAM is a tough game.
The third problem was just so no one would double three times
and let them make all three. Other than that one, all these problems
are super close. The panel consensus is not illuminating, though they
pretty much all psyched on the last hand. That's good...the
ACBL doesn't like auctions where it's normal to psych, but I
have found one, so I can tell them to take their illegal nonsense
and go away. I agree with Chris' choice on problem #4. If you
are going to guess, you might as well get some vigorish. His
call is the only one which does. I think it is the best call
of the set. Probably many more would have bid if they
had thought of bidding 3.